RTSguru.com has published a list of the best space-based 4x strategy games, and has included Galactic Civilizations II and Sins of a Solar Empire in their list!
What do you think about the choices?
http://www.rtsguru.com/features/160/The-List-Best-Space-Based-4X-Strategy-Games.html
2) Sins of a Solar Empire – I’m including this one even if the developers didn’t/don’t really consider it strictly a 4X game, they prefer the tag of RT4X. Which, I guess I kinda get their point; it was a blend of RTS and 4X after all. Whatever you want to call it, Sins is a blast to play. While it didn’t have as many different races and other depth as most 4X games out there, that actually improved the multiplayer side of things. Most 4X games don’t really cater to multiplayer, since they make for some really long games. The fact that Sins was a RTS/4X hybrid, it was quite a bit faster to play and lead to some fun multiplayer games. Ironclad released 2 ‘micro-expansions’ and one full-fledged stand-alone expansion that greatly improved and expanded the game.
Hmm, the choices are interestingly narrow, in my opinion. I am sure that there are more space 4X games than just that.
I thought Stars! was a better game than MOO in its day. And Distant Worlds sits right on the top of the tree for me now as the best space-based 4X game ever made.
A very bizarre list.
SMAC? Um, whatever. Great game, to be sure, but 'space based' Only if you're stretching the taffy from New York to LA.
MoO2 at #1? I don't really have any rebuttal to that, but meh, I don't think it should be at #1 anymore, seems based more off of the emotional attachment to that game from back when rather than the fact that it's actually 'better' than other contenders who have had decades to improve upon the standard (though for my money MoO is better than 2, but whatever).
My rank of those 5 games would look like this.
1) SotS (because it gets just about everything right, and captures the feel of different races so perfectly)
2) MoO3 (because I'm sick in the head, no seriously, with the user mods/patches that game was so close to perfection for my tastes)
...
everything in a pile somewhere far beneath.
Meh, Sins deserves a spot up there.
And yes, I agree that his choices were based on an emotional attachment to the games, as opposed to a real analysis.
Yes! Never heard anyone else with that opinion
Wow, seriously? All I remember is horror (though not as much as my Star Control III horror, of course - what is it with the 3s?). Maybe I should give it a look again sometime, I might have the original packaging even.
The list's lack of Stars! or Space Empires 3/4, (great games all of them) and inclusion of Alpha Centauri (a great game, but hardly a 4x in the sense of the other 4), kind of ruins any credibility the list and its author had in my eyes
It isn't as if there have only been 4 good 4x titles, and he had to seriously reach to fill that 5th slot. So I have to assume that either emotions played a very big role, or the author has had a more limited 4x experience than such a list might have required.
Using the unofficial patches, you get a game that is much better balanced, more stable, and more enjoyable. I wouldn't call it perfect, but it suddenly became fun to play with friends.
Yes, it is not perfect (then again what is?), but for my tastes... it was very enjoyable. The 'marco' style actually worked really well, once you got over the learning curve. The Ship and Fleet design was among the best I have ever seen (though the UI was a bit sub-optimal). Even the battles were well executed, though perhaps a bit light on tactics, but they worked well for me.
I think what I appreciated the most about MoO3 was the design philosophy (if not always the mechanics). The first versions of the game were horribly broken in many ways though, rendering it largely unplayable. However, once the player mods/patches started correcting those game breaking issues you were left with an entirely different game play style, as well as all the options you are used to from the MoOverse.
Still not perfect, but damn, I wish someone else would pick up on the design, and just do it right from start to end.
That's true of pretty much every "top 5 X games" ever created, pretty much every game review, and almost every thread on this site. This stuff is all subjective. Like putting Sword of the Stars on the list, which I would never do because the UI is terrible and it ruins the game for me. (Or if Sins and SMAC even belong on a "4X" list, which that people can't even agree on exactly what a 4X is demonstrates the point quite nicely.)
"Real analysis" requires objective measurements, and nobody rebuffing the list is using those because you can't objectively measure fun.
MOO II is the second best game I have ever played (shared with Total Annihilation). Only topped by CIV IV.
Therefore I agree on the number one spot
I'm confused...
How is the UI in SotS terrible? Granted, it's your opinion, but I'm curious about why you find it terrible.
The UI in MoO3 was terrible, until it got fixed, and then it was only bad.
Off the top of my head because I haven't looked at it lately... the research screen has that annoying circular room nonsense that makes it impossible to see what's available without a large amount of awkward scrolling. I found the map hard to read and navigate, kept having issues with sending multiple ships anywhere (I guess they weren't grouped right), and in general found it clunky and totally unintuitive. I fought to make the UI do what I wanted far too many times and it annoyed me into dropping the game entirely.
If they devote some time to improving it in the sequel I'll take another look.
I love SMAC, and still play it from time to time. But it is not, IMHO, a space based 4X game, except in the sense that all 4x games 'happen' in space - even if that space is earth (Civ series) or confined to another planet (SMAC). Typically, a space based game means interplanetary or higher in scale of game play, along with exploring other planets, solar systems, etc. Admittedly, I haven't seen one that scales up to actual exploration, between, two or more galaxies. Porting 'pirates' into space would not make it a space based 4x game.
One game not listed, that is on my list of the top five space based 4x games is: Distant Worlds. I enjoy GalCiv, and SotS (my fav).
I dunno, the research tree is zoomable, you can out far enough to see what you need to see. You can turn on or off the names as well, since they can be annoying or necessary depending on your zoom level. The tree being 'round' is no less annoying than any other tree I've ever seen. At least not because it's round.
The 3D star map is a PITA until you get used to it. But that's not a UI issue, that's a design choice for actually having the galaxy be real 3D. And of course there are galaxy shapes which more closely approximate 2D so it's easier to have a top down kind of view if that's what floats your boat.
Ship grouping? Again, the fleet manager is the 'best' place to do that, though not the only. there are also various flags you can add to fleets so that they show or don't show or whatever in various lists. I've not seen a game which does it any better honestly, and in particular, ship design is very well handled compared to other games in this genre.
I don't think the UI is going to be significantly different in SotS][, and for my money, it doesn't need to be, but to each their own. The one UI gripe I do have about SotS is that you can't jump to different pages in the info\history screens easily, but that's not really so terrible. I'd also like to see a better way to do ship construction across multiple worlds from a singe screen (this is sorta doable, but I don't care for the implementation), then again, you're not usually building ships at every planet every turn, other than when you have very few planets, so it is kind of a non-issue other than when you want to put a PC at each world, which only happens once when you get the tech to build them.
I can't get into SotS because of the UI. Bought the game, tried to play...I just didn't get into it.
It is difficult initially. It took me a few tries as well. I recommend waiting a bit then try try again. You will be rewarded.
I played the SotS demo the other day, and it's a lot more fun than I remembered. I don't like the pace or scale of the game, but I understand why others like it.
The UI isn't bad apart from the research tree, which gives me headaches. (I had to down an ibuprofin at one point.) At the very worst, it's as bad as that of any other space-based 4X TBS. Fleet management is actually handled quite well.
I don't get the dislike of the UI on the research tree.
It is zoomable you realize.
That and it's not a huge pile of many worthless techs you need to research to get to a good tech. Depending on how you set econ/research, you will only bother on a few areas of it anyway, until you have either lost, or built your empire to a size where you're not as concerned about the next tech anyway.
I mean I loved MoO and MoO2 (and 3 for that matter), but the tech 'tree' in those games was hardly a 'tree', and fairly uninteresting anyway.
I realize it's zoomable, but then you have to deal with painfully small icons and poor anti-aliasing. The tree wouldn't have either of these problems if it were represented using projected textures, rather than models.
I have no problems with the tech tree itself, just how it's represented in the interface. Personally, I like static tech trees more than randomized ones, but different strokes for different folks and all that.
On another note, I just watched several videos showcasing the interface in SotS II, and it looks fantastic! They've kept the headache-inducing tech tree, but the starmap is excellent! I love the side window with the system view! And everything is nice and flat - no complicated hierarchy of windows like in other games. I'm working on a space-based 4x RTS as a personal project, but have been struggling with the interface. I'll definitely be stealing a lot of these ideas.
You can turn on the names via toggle, so no matter the zoom you can clearly see what each tech is. I've not had any AA issues, but everyone has different specs on their machines.
I think all the talk about specifics is missing the point. The problem with the tech tree isn't that it's unplayable, it's that it's less playable than its alternatives - namely, the two-dimensional representation used by nearly every other game on the market.
Sure, the problems may not be so bad or maybe they can be ameliorated. But I shouldn't have to settle for not-so-bad or have to do something to ameliorate a problem which need not exist in the first place. (e.g. Yes, the interface can be zoomed, but then technologies are harder to select than they need to be; yes, better aliasing solves some of the problems with resampling, but it doesn't solve all of them; etc.)
Really, I think it comes down to this: interacting with the three-dimensional tech tree just isn't fun enough (for me) to outweigh its disadvantages. Ease of use shouldn't be the only consideration when designed user interfaces - sliders are easy to use, but aren't very fun - but this is a case in which (again, for me) there isn't any advantage to the system, only disadvantages - irrespective of how significant these disadvantages actually are.
Exactly zigzag. It's possible to use it anyway and it's possible to fiddle around to make it slightly less painful... but why? This is a problem that's been solved already, there's no excuse for them to use a clearly inferior method just to be different. (And yes, this is entirely a UI issue. I'm not talking about the techs themselves, just that 3d circular room BS.)
I want to play the game, not screw around trying to make the UI show me what I want to see.
To each their own.
I don't find it any less easy to use than the tech tree in Civ4.
Can you give me an example of a complex and robust tech tree which 'does it right'? You can't use any of the MoOs, they are neither complex nor robust. I wouldn't really accept GalCiv either, because if my memory serves me, there was a lot of scrolling to be done there as well.
But I get the feeling that this isn't really a UI issue. Fun? Interacting with the tech tree is something you do once every 'X' (where X is usually >8) turns. The tech pace, as well as the tech design (not the UI) is different from most other 4x games I've played. In as much as it's not the every turn focus it can be in other games. I just don't buy this 'the UI is crap' argument, because it's not crap. It's different, and sure, you may or may not like it, but it's no less inferior to anything else based solely on ease of navigation, or representation of information. That is, what game gives you that complete tech tree picture which is actually useful? What game does not require you to scroll (circular vs. flat? who really cares?) to navigate the tech tree? Or worse, jump between tabs to see the different areas (more clicky, still have to scroll probably).
So what is the point of UI anyway, if that's really what we're griping about?
Is not a UI issue. It's a learning curve issue for not just how to use the UI (because come on, the UI in SotS is not difficult to figure out), but what the techs actually are, and how they implemented techs and research as a mechanic in the game. Or, what do you really want to see? The whole tech tree laid flat? That would be rather pointless considering the zoom level you'd have to go out to see the whole thing (as evidenced by those who put it flat on the wiki).
So if you don't like it, so be it, I'm not going to argue that you should like it. The idea that the UI is bad, is just bizarre to me though, because it does everything you want a UI to do, and it tends to do it with fewer clicks than most other UIs I've seen (you know you can drag it right?). It also displays the information you need, though sure, you need to do some customizing on zoom level or display setting or whatever, but meh, once you set that up, and once you learn the hot keys it's as fast to get anywhere as anything else, for the level of detail and complexity it contains.
The UI for SotS is very clunky. You can't see who has NAPs without scrolling over the info in the Diplomacy Screen, you can't see how close your tech is to being finished without scrolling over the research box, simply moving a ship takes 3 clicks, scrolling all around the tech tree is a PITA, rebellions and outbreaks have no audio notifications and can easily be missed if you're waiting a couple turns, etc... (For a tech tree done right, SoaSE.)
A bigger problem though is lack of documentation on stuff. I had to go to the wiki to figure out just what the hell 'Integrated Battle Systems' does because the game only gives a vague idea of what it actually does.
What game does not require you to scroll (circular vs. flat? who really cares?) to navigate the tech tree? Or worse, jump between tabs to see the different areas (more clicky, still have to scroll probably).There's nothing wrong with scrolling or tabs. Or at worst, they're necessary evils because of the need to represent a large amount of information on a small screen.Circular scrolling gives me headaches...
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
